Cultural adaptation of the Italian version of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Event (PRO-CTCAE®).

INTRODUCTION: US National Cancer Institute's (NCI) Patient-Reported Outcomes version of the Common Terminology Criteria for Adverse Events (PRO-CTCAE®) is a library of 78 symptom terms and 124 items enabling patient reporting of symptomatic adverse events in cancer trials. This multicenter study used mixed methods to develop an Italian language version of this widely accepted measure, and describe the content validity and reliability in a diverse sample of Italian-speaking patients. METHODS: All PRO-CTCAE items were translated in accordance with international guidelines. Subsequently, the content validity of the PRO-CTCAE-Italian was explored and iteratively refined through cognitive debriefing interviews. Participants (n=96; 52% male; median age 64 years; 26% older adults; 18% lower educational attainment) completed a PRO-CTCAE survey and participated in a semi-structured interview to determine if the translation captured the concepts of the original English language PRO-CTCAE, and to evaluate comprehension, clarity and ease of judgement. Test-retest reliability of the finalized measure was explored in a second sample (n=135). RESULTS: Four rounds of cognitive debriefing interviews were conducted. The majority of PRO-CTCAE symptom terms, attributes and associated response choices were well-understood, and respondents found the items easy to judge. To improve comprehension and clarity, the symptom terms for nausea and pain were rephrased and retested in subsequent interview rounds. Test-retest reliability was excellent for 41/49 items (84%); the median intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.83 (range 0.64-0.94). DISCUSSION: Results support the semantic, conceptual and pragmatic equivalence of PRO-CTCAE-Italian to the original English version, and provide preliminary descriptive evidence of content validity and reliability.

Triple-negative breast cancer: current state of the art.

AIMS AND BACKGROUND: Triple-negative breast cancer, defined by a lack of expression of estrogen, progesterone and HER-2 receptors, accounts for 15% of all types of breast cancer. The subtype mainly includes a molecularly distinct subgroup, the basal-like subtype (accounting for 75% of all cases). We attempt to define triple-negative breast cancer and compare it with basal-like disease, review the molecular, pathologic and clinical features of triple-negative disease, provide an overview of a retrospective subset analysis of clinical trials, and outline ongoing therapeutic trials and possible paths for future research. METHODS: We collected data regarding classification, molecular and clinical features and treatment, drawn from the existing literature, including abstracts and verbal accounts. By the term "basal-like", we defined all cases where gene expression array or more sophisticated immunophenotypes are used for identification. When the analysis is restricted to clinical assay (immunohistochemistry), we refer to "triple-negative". RESULTS: Basal-like breast cancer expresses genes characteristic of basal epithelial cells, which include high-molecular weight basal cytokeratins (CK5/6, CK14, CK17), vimentin, p-cadherin, alpha B crystalline, caveolins 1 and 2 and EGFR. The expression of basal markers (basal cytokeratins and EGFR) is related to a worse prognosis and identifies a clinically distinct subgroup within the triple-negative breast cancer. BRCA1 mutations are present in 11% of triple-negative tumors and even more rare is BRCA2 deficiency. BR-CA1-associated breast cancers types are typically characterized by a high rate of DNA aberrations and defective DNA repair pathways (the so-called "BRCAness"). The use of regimens based on DNA-damaging agents, such as anthracyclines, platinum derivatives and cyclophosphamide seems a sensible option for this breast cancer subtypes. Clinical data support a strong sensitivity to primary chemotherapy with pathologic response rates ranging from 27-45% (with anthracyclines and taxanes) to more than 60% with platinum-based triplets. However, based on retrospective data, major response to chemotherapy does not carry better survival ("triple-negative paradox"). There is no specific targeted therapy in the armamentarium: ongoing trials include anti-angiogenic agents, anti-EGFR and EGFR-TK inhibitors, epothilones and PARP inhibitors. CONCLUSIONS: A specific systemic regimen cannot yet be recommended. Moreover, only a few data are available on which treatment selection can be based. Use of the existing cytotoxic agents can be optimized for this patient subgroup by investigating the proliferative signals and the suitability of these signals as therapeutic targets, besides assessing the BRCA1-pathway in this subgroup as regards treatment. A greater understanding of the pathologic and molecular characteristics of this phenotype may lead to customized treatment for these patients.

Italian Survey on adjuvant treatment of non-small cell lung cancer (ISA).

BACKGROUND: A recent pooled analysis of randomized trials indicated significant improvement in overall survival from cisplatin-based adjuvant chemotherapy for non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), depending on disease stage (only in stages II and III) and PS (≤ 1). Post-operative radiotherapy (RT) is optional for pN2 tumours. PATIENTS AND METHODS: To evaluate opinions and daily clinical practice of Italian Oncologists about adjuvant treatment of NSCLC, a 46-item questionnaire was delivered via e-mail. RESULTS: Seventy-eight physicians from 68 Centers (out of 98 contacted) returned their questionnaire. Seventy-four, 86, 94, and 78% of them give the indication for adjuvant chemotherapy for stage IIA, IIB, IIIA, and IIIB disease, respectively and 14% in stage IB disease. Stage, PS, and age are taken into consideration evaluating adjuvant approach by 97, 95 and 73%, respectively. Cisplatin-vinorelbine (64%) and cisplatin-gemcitabine (33%), for 4 cycles (81%), are the preferred regimens, while 32% use different regimens. Ninety-two percent indicate RT in pN2 disease and/or positive resection margins. Real Number of patients Needed to Treat (NNT) is probably not completely known/understood and/or used by physicians. CONCLUSIONS: A substantial adherence between clinical daily practice in Italy and scientific progresses is described in this paper, even with some discordances regarding the most appropriate adjuvant chemotherapy regimen.